Government Spying on Millions (Verizon)

dshans

They call me The Dribbler
Messages
9,624
Reaction score
1,181
Don't kid yourself, they're storing everything.

I don't doubt it. It's not so much the cost of the storage itself as it is the "feeding and care." Machines and personnel to gather and maintain the system are an ongoing expense. When I started on that slippery slope to being a lib'ral back in 1967 I doubt that there were all that many bytes of computer storage space floating about, much less giga-gigabytes. Paper was still king.

As a sophomore at ND there was a widely circulated assertion that a new federal tax on long distance phone calls was used to fund the Viet Nam dalliance. I doubt that it was true, but when I wrote a check to Indiana Bell for the few calls I made from the phone in my dorm room, I subtracted the federal tax and enclosed a note explaining why. Indiana Bell never said "boo."

Five years later I got a notice from the feds that they would freeze my bank accounts and/or garnish my wages if I didn't pay the $2.35 I owed. A bit scary. And "penny wise and pound foolish" on the part of the gov. It was tempting to see how far they would go and how much they would spend to collect that mind boggling sum, but as a taxpayer I didn't condone wasteful spending so I chuckled and ponied up.
 

Whiskeyjack

Mittens Margaritas Ante Porcos
Staff member
Messages
20,894
Reaction score
8,126
The Atlantic's Conor Friedersdorf just published an article titled "The Problem with 'Privacy Moderates'":

[E]xcessive fear of terrorism is causing government officials to wildly, perhaps cynically overreact, and skewing national policy in all sorts of onerous ways. Saying so demonstrates more clear-thinking than a great part of establishment Washington, D.C. But if that is something you believe, it makes no logical sense to position yourself as an antagonist to Greenwald and Snowden, focusing a large part of your limited space on their perceived shortcomings. Criticizing them isn't verboten, just beside the point, unless the point is to remain a "very serious person."

The privacy moderate is deeply uncomfortable with the implications of being allied with Snowden and Greenwald, and against Bush, Cheney, Obama, Clinton, Brennan, Feinstein, and Clapper. The privacy moderate "knows" that Snowden and Greenwald are the radicals; yet the privacy moderate can't help but stumble toward a conclusion they're desperate to avoid: the establishment's policies have implications far more radical than the most strident voices opposing them.

...

In fact, the U.S. government is, right this second, pouring untold billions into what is ultimately an effort to monitor all digital communications; scan all mail; amass a fleet of surveillance drones that can hover in the sky for days on end; develop technology to scan all faces in crowds; assemble gigantic databases of biometric data; break all encryption efforts; indiscriminately spy on millions of citizens in friendly countries like Germany and Brazil; and share spy technologies with allies. None of that is in dispute. What's hyperbolic is calling people hysterical because they see the endgame of various plans to impose ever broader surveillance on whole societies. There isn't a government document somewhere titled, "The Plan to Destroy Global Privacy," but that is exactly what Western intelligence agencies will do if adequately funded and left, unopposed, to their own devices. Anyone who can't see that hasn't adequately grappled with the implications of Snowden's revelations, the history of spy agencies allowed to operate in secret, or the radical new capabilities that advances in data analysis and retention have given states (and are likely to give them in the near future if they aren't stopped).
 
B

Buster Bluth

Guest
TnCZgsD.png
 
B

Bogtrotter07

Guest
Thought this post would be about Snowden? Guess again. Here is the answer to all those who claim they don't have anything to hide. And PS. Anyone who claims that the IRS targeted conservative organizations is off their rocker. They target everybody.

IRS unwittingly exposes thousands of Social Security numbers

William Holt 1 hour ago
Yahoo! News Internal Revenue Service

IRS headquarters in Washington, D.C. (Matthew Cavanaugh/Getty)
If it weren’t in enough hot water already, the Internal Revenue Service has slipped up again, reports the National Journal.

Still under fire for targeting conservative political groups, the IRS unwittingly exposed on government websites the Social Security numbers of tens of thousands of Americans last week, according to a recent audit from the independent transparency group Public.Resource.org.

The exposed numbers came from nonprofit political groups known as 527s, which have to file taxes with the IRS that ultimately wind up in an agency database. According to the National Journal, the IRS frequently sends updated records of this database to many public-interest groups, such as Public.Resource.org—but when the IRS told that group’s founder, Carl Malamud, to ignore part of the filings from earlier this year, the transparency advocate decided to take a closer look.

With a little digging, the reason for the agency’s unusual request soon became apparent: Malamud and Public.Resource.org found that the IRS forgot to redact the Social Security numbers of tens of thousands of individuals involved in those political groups. When the group notified the IRS of its mistake on July 2, the database was taken down immediately. But according to the National Journal, “the damage was done.”

In its report, Public.Resource.org wrote, “While the public posting of this database serves a vital public purpose (and this database must be restored as quickly as possible), the failure to remove individual Social Security numbers is an extraordinarily reckless act.”

The IRS has since responded with a statement saying the agency is “assessing the situation and exploring available options,” according to the National Journal.
 

phgreek

New member
Messages
6,956
Reaction score
433
Thought this post would be about Snowden? Guess again. Here is the answer to all those who claim they don't have anything to hide. And PS. Anyone who claims that the IRS targeted conservative organizations is off their rocker. They target everybody.

...looking for the part where its clear there was no targeting of conservatives. This reference clearly makes the point that government employees make mistakes...but an IT screwup isn't at all what went on with the earlier scandal

...dude they already acknowledged what they were doing...the only argument is who gets to go to jail? I doubt anyone even loses their job, much less goes to jail over the targeting deal precisely because it wasn't an isolated mistake.

The IT goof above...yea the security person will get fired because he wasn't operating on direction from folks on high.
 

kmoose

Banned
Messages
10,298
Reaction score
1,181
And PS. Anyone who claims that the IRS targeted conservative organizations is off their rocker.

Now that the government has acknowledged that there was, in fact, a "watchlist", containing certain keywords/keyphrases to be watchful for, the fact that the IRS targeted conservative organizations is not in dispute. And, while there were some liberal keywords/keyphrases on that list, as well; not ONE liberal group has charged that the IRS asked them overly intrusive questions about their organization, which is the complaint that conservative organizations had against the IRS, in the first place. That the IRS made it onerously difficult for conservative organizations to achieve tax-exempt status is not in question, anymore. The question is now whether or not the IRS employees did this of their own accord, or whether they acted upon the direction of their superiors.
 
B

Bogtrotter07

Guest
Now that the government has acknowledged that there was, in fact, a "watchlist", containing certain keywords/keyphrases to be watchful for, the fact that the IRS targeted conservative organizations is not in dispute. And, while there were some liberal keywords/keyphrases on that list, as well; not ONE liberal group has charged that the IRS asked them overly intrusive questions about their organization, which is the complaint that conservative organizations had against the IRS, in the first place. That the IRS made it onerously difficult for conservative organizations to achieve tax-exempt status is not in question, anymore. The question is now whether or not the IRS employees did this of their own accord, or whether they acted upon the direction of their superiors.

Exactly!

Some brain trust found a way to search the hot topic non-profits, figuring their would be more fraudulent activity than for other organizations not linked to political hot topics. But that is not the point of this whole thing! You all will not be able to stop the liberal-conservative thing, even after everything is gone!


Here is the point: YOU ARE GIVING THE IRS AS AN EXTENSION OF THIS QUASI-GOVERNMENTAL AGENCY OPERATION UNLIMITED CONTROL OVER PERSONAL INFORMATION. THE ONLY THING THIS WILL RESULT IN IS SLAVERY NOT FREEDOM!

I want to see one person say that you couldn't be destroyed if someone had you ssn, and other personal information. I could do it and I don't know your @sses from a whole in the ground. Let alone the stupid @ss mistakes that the IRS regularly makes (along with all other agencies, assuming they all will have everything).
 

kmoose

Banned
Messages
10,298
Reaction score
1,181
Exactly!

Some brain trust found a way to search the hot topic non-profits, figuring their would be more fraudulent activity than for other organizations not linked to political hot topics. But that is not the point of this whole thing! You all will not be able to stop the liberal-conservative thing, even after everything is gone!


Here is the point: YOU ARE GIVING THE IRS AS AN EXTENSION OF THIS QUASI-GOVERNMENTAL AGENCY OPERATION UNLIMITED CONTROL OVER PERSONAL INFORMATION. THE ONLY THING THIS WILL RESULT IN IS SLAVERY NOT FREEDOM!

I want to see one person say that you couldn't be destroyed if someone had you ssn, and other personal information. I could do it and I don't know your @sses from a whole in the ground. Let alone the stupid @ss mistakes that the IRS regularly makes (along with all other agencies, assuming they all will have everything).

What does any of the above have to do with your contention that "Anyone who claims that the IRS targeted conservative organizations is off their rocker."
 
B

Bogtrotter07

Guest
What does any of the above have to do with your contention that "Anyone who claims that the IRS targeted conservative organizations is off their rocker."

I never ever, ever claimed the IRS targeted conservative organizations was off their rocker. I claimed: "Anyone who claims that the IRS targeted conservative organizations is off their rocker. They target everybody."

This is what I don't like about this site anymore. Some people on this site are more interested in starting arguments and being right than quoting another in context. What I said isn't that hard to grasp kmoose. And it is central to any kind of intelligent discussion. People that are taking rights away are pitting one side against the other. They are targeting everyone. I think it is paranoid and further, it is stupid for any group to cry they are exclusive targets. It precludes the public working together to put these criminals in check.

What group are you in kmoose? Are you more interested in being right or maintaining freedom?

Because I will tell you all. I think the general public is turning into the most dandified collection of pussified, candy asses imaginable. I have to laugh, 'conservatives' are acting like a bunch of ravished 40 year-olds lamenting their lost virginity; and 'liberals' don't know whether to shiit or get off the pot because 'change you can believe in' has become 'the freedom you have lost!' It is so funny to see people take this kind of @ss****ing, which is so against what they claim their principles to be, just because they are unwilling to get off their principles, and meet the matters at hand!
 
Last edited:

kmoose

Banned
Messages
10,298
Reaction score
1,181
I never ever, ever claimed the IRS targeted conservative organizations was off their rocker. I claimed: "Anyone who claims that the IRS targeted conservative organizations is off their rocker. They target everybody."

This is what I don't like about this site anymore. Some people on this site are more interested in starting arguments and being right than quoting another in context. What I said isn't that hard to grasp kmoose. And it is central to any kind of intelligent discussion. People that are taking rights away are pitting one side against the other. They are targeting everyone. I think it is paranoid and further, it is stupid for any group to cry they are exclusive targets. It precludes the public working together to put these criminals in check.

What group are you in kmoose? Are you more interested in being right or maintaining freedom?

Because I will tell you all. I think the general public is turning into the most dandified collection of pussified, candy asses imaginable. I have to laugh, 'conservatives' are acting like a bunch of ravished 40 year-olds lamenting their lost virginity; and 'liberals' don't know whether to shiit or get off the pot because 'change you can believe in' has become 'the freedom you have lost!' It is so funny to see people take this kind of @ss****ing, which is so against what they claim their principles to be, just because they are unwilling to get off their principles, and meet the matters at hand!

So you're saying that the IRS targeted people by releasing their SSNs?

How about this? How about you quit b1tch1ng about lost freedoms, and DO something about it? Have you run for public office somewhere? Lead, follow, or get the F*CK out of the way. It's not about being right or wrong; it's about being honest with ourselves. WE THE PEOPLE elect the government, and WE THE PEOPLE are responsible for it being f*cked up. And people sitting around b1thcing about it isn't going to fix anything.
 
B

Bogtrotter07

Guest
So you're saying that the IRS targeted people by releasing their SSNs?

How about this? How about you quit b1tch1ng about lost freedoms, and DO something about it? Have you run for public office somewhere? Lead, follow, or get the F*CK out of the way. It's not about being right or wrong; it's about being honest with ourselves. WE THE PEOPLE elect the government, and WE THE PEOPLE are responsible for it being f*cked up. And people sitting around b1thcing about it isn't going to fix anything.

Un ****ing believable.

In simple English:

The government cannot be trusted with any more data than they must absolutely have and the IRS is PROOF OF IT!

Anyone's SSN being broadcast is enough to ruin them!

I am ready to run on a ticket with you anytime, big boy! How stupid is this? Really? I am out of here!
 

phgreek

New member
Messages
6,956
Reaction score
433
So you're saying that the IRS targeted people by releasing their SSNs?

How about this? How about you quit b1tch1ng about lost freedoms, and DO something about it? Have you run for public office somewhere? Lead, follow, or get the F*CK out of the way. It's not about being right or wrong; it's about being honest with ourselves. WE THE PEOPLE elect the government, and WE THE PEOPLE are responsible for it being f*cked up. And people sitting around b1thcing about it isn't going to fix anything.

I agree this mess is OUR fault in the sense that we do not own the responsibility of being citizens like our grandfathers did...we've assumed citizenship like a hand-me-down, and its largely why we give it away w/o a second thought...but I digress.

...being a US citizen is serious business, and requires EFFORT. I do not think everyone needs to run for office...but they do need to be educated and participate. The other thing is that it takes rabble rousers to point to issues and beat the drum until people understand. Do you know there are people out there who have NO FVCKING CLUE regarding any scandal as of late...NONE. If a few can be slapped into "consciousness" on sports related chat spaces...I'm all for it. Its clear many here lobby for the view of the world that its all "OK". Sometimes fighting that mentality brings folks to sound like they are bitching...but when you argue the validity of a point...its hard to move on to what to do about it...also the presumption that folks who bitch aren't doing something is faulty...I think its safer to say those that aren't bitching are the problem.
 
B

Buster Bluth

Guest
69% of wiretaps using the Patriot Act are for drug busts. DRUG BUSTS.

Where are the terrorists?! Oh that's right, they haven't ****ing defined terrorism.

http://big.assets.huffingtonpost.com/SneakAndPeakReport.pdf

I'm waiting for your response to this, BobD. I made the claim that these terrorist-fighting laws will be used to purposes they weren't intended for. This is proof.

Here's another one, "ag-gag laws." The corporations who own disgusting feedlots don't like activists getting inside and exposing the truth. It's really hurting their brand. Think The Jungle part deux; they want to prevent that and keep the food system in the dark. How do they pass it? SECURITY MEASURES!! "A terrorist could use pictures and poison us and cripple out food system! We've got to protect America!" Thus, “Farm Animal and Field Crop and Research Facilities Protection Act.”

And now a National Geographic photographer taking aerial photos was arrested for it: NatGeo Photographer Arrested in Kansas

It's beginning to look a little too much like a police state for my tastes.
 
Last edited:

ShawneeIrish

Well-known member
Messages
1,325
Reaction score
137
I'm waiting for your response to this, BobD. I made the claim that these terrorist-fighting laws will be used to purposes they weren't intended for. This is proof.

Here's another one, "ag-gag laws." The corporations who own disgusting feedlots don't like activists getting inside and exposing the truth. It's really hurting their brand. Think The Jungle part deux; they want to prevent that and keep the food system in the dark. How do they pass it? SECURITY MEASURES!! "A terrorist could use pictures and poison us and cripple out food system! We've got to protect America!" Thus, “Farm Animal and Field Crop and Research Facilities Protection Act.”

And now a National Geographic photographer taking aerial photos was arrested for it: NatGeo Photographer Arrested in Kansas

It's beginning to look a little too much like a police state for my tastes.


Yep I agree. I heard a talk from Thomas Durkin a big time Chicago defense attorney where he was talking about how the main use of all the war on terror Patriot Act type legislation would be to prosecute the war on drugs. He made the point that whenever criminal laws and protections are changed and its claimed that it will only be used for a small category of individuals its always expanded. He cited the example that everyone used to have to be given some bail amount in federal trials, they then changed this in the 80s but said bail would only be withheld in most extreme cases when dealing with the worst of the worst, he said today something like 85% of federal defendants are not given bail. I very much want to read his law review article on the subject but I have yet to have the chance. Here is a link to it if you or anyone else is interested.

http://www3.nd.edu/~ndjicl/V2I2/Durkin.pdf
 
B

Bogtrotter07

Guest
Okay, so I came back to post this:


Statement by Edward Snowden to human rights groups at Moscow’s Sheremetyevo airport
Friday July 12, 15:00 UTC

Edward Joseph Snowden delivered a statement to human rights organizations and individuals at Sheremetyevo airport at 5pm Moscow time today, Friday 12th July. The meeting lasted 45 minutes. The human rights organizations included Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch and were given the opportunity afterwards to ask Mr Snowden questions. The Human Rights Watch representative used this opportunity to tell Mr Snowden that on her way to the airport she had received a call from the US Ambassador to Russia, who asked her to relay to Mr Snowden that the US Government does not categorise Mr Snowden as a whistleblower and that he has broken United States law. This further proves the United States Government’s persecution of Mr Snowden and therefore that his right to seek and accept asylum should be upheld. Seated to the left of Mr. Snowden was Sarah Harrison, a legal advisor in this matter from WikiLeaks and to Mr. Snowden’s right, a translator.

Transcript of Edward Joseph Snowden statement, given at 5pm Moscow time on Friday 12th July 2013. (Transcript corrected to delivery)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hello. My name is Ed Snowden. A little over one month ago, I had family, a home in paradise, and I lived in great comfort. I also had the capability without any warrant to search for, seize, and read your communications. Anyone’s communications at any time. That is the power to change people’s fates.

It is also a serious violation of the law. The 4th and 5th Amendments to the Constitution of my country, Article 12 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and numerous statutes and treaties forbid such systems of massive, pervasive surveillance. While the US Constitution marks these programs as illegal, my government argues that secret court rulings, which the world is not permitted to see, somehow legitimize an illegal affair. These rulings simply corrupt the most basic notion of justice – that it must be seen to be done. The immoral cannot be made moral through the use of secret law.

I believe in the principle declared at Nuremberg in 1945: "Individuals have international duties which transcend the national obligations of obedience. Therefore individual citizens have the duty to violate domestic laws to prevent crimes against peace and humanity from occurring."

Accordingly, I did what I believed right and began a campaign to correct this wrongdoing. I did not seek to enrich myself. I did not seek to sell US secrets. I did not partner with any foreign government to guarantee my safety. Instead, I took what I knew to the public, so what affects all of us can be discussed by all of us in the light of day, and I asked the world for justice.

That moral decision to tell the public about spying that affects all of us has been costly, but it was the right thing to do and I have no regrets.

Since that time, the government and intelligence services of the United States of America have attempted to make an example of me, a warning to all others who might speak out as I have. I have been made stateless and hounded for my act of political expression. The United States Government has placed me on no-fly lists. It demanded Hong Kong return me outside of the framework of its laws, in direct violation of the principle of non-refoulement – the Law of Nations. It has threatened with sanctions countries who would stand up for my human rights and the UN asylum system. It has even taken the unprecedented step of ordering military allies to ground a Latin American president’s plane in search for a political refugee. These dangerous escalations represent a threat not just to the dignity of Latin America, but to the basic rights shared by every person, every nation, to live free from persecution, and to seek and enjoy asylum.

Yet even in the face of this historically disproportionate aggression, countries around the world have offered support and asylum. These nations, including Russia, Venezuela, Bolivia, Nicaragua, and Ecuador have my gratitude and respect for being the first to stand against human rights violations carried out by the powerful rather than the powerless. By refusing to compromise their principles in the face of intimidation, they have earned the respect of the world. It is my intention to travel to each of these countries to extend my personal thanks to their people and leaders.

I announce today my formal acceptance of all offers of support or asylum I have been extended and all others that may be offered in the future. With, for example, the grant of asylum provided by Venezuela’s President Maduro, my asylee status is now formal, and no state has a basis by which to limit or interfere with my right to enjoy that asylum. As we have seen, however, some governments in Western European and North American states have demonstrated a willingness to act outside the law, and this behavior persists today. This unlawful threat makes it impossible for me to travel to Latin America and enjoy the asylum granted there in accordance with our shared rights.

This willingness by powerful states to act extra-legally represents a threat to all of us, and must not be allowed to succeed. Accordingly, I ask for your assistance in requesting guarantees of safe passage from the relevant nations in securing my travel to Latin America, as well as requesting asylum in Russia until such time as these states accede to law and my legal travel is permitted. I will be submitting my request to Russia today, and hope it will be accepted favorably.

If you have any questions, I will answer what I can.

Thank you.
 

Fbolt

I've been around
Messages
6,932
Reaction score
2,254
Ha- if you think these are Snowden's words you're sadly mistaken. You have just posted a carefully constructed PR memo. IMO, he's a traitor and this is not open for discussion in my book. If you are unable to see that, then we are too far apart to reasonably discuss.
 

BobD

Can't get no satisfaction
Messages
7,918
Reaction score
1,034
Ha- if you think these are Snowden's words you're sadly mistaken. You have just posted a carefully constructed PR memo. IMO, he's a traitor and this is not open for discussion in my book. If you are unable to see that, then we are too far apart to reasonably discuss.

I agree 100%.

Remember back in the day, when someone stole state secrets and went to Russia....We just called them a traitor. How someone could feel differently is beyond me.
 
B

Bogtrotter07

Guest
Whew, that is good, because I just posted the statement. I don't have an opinion on it.

But I remember the good old days. I remember Robert Hanssen, the FBI agent, the real conservative Catholic, went to Mass every day, didn't he belong to Opus Dei? Yup, he did it for the money. He did it for over 20 years. He was responsible for killing more people with the intelligence he sold, than Chenney, Rove, and Libbey were for their leaks.

But where is the money?
 
B

Bogtrotter07

Guest

This is why I don't think this is an old school loyalty issue, spying and, so on.


Putin is trying to control this for the US.

That with the fact that the So American block believes the NSA was working on their public internet. The NSA was way above and beyond. I am so glad it was our NSA because if it had been the KBVG or any other agency we would have been really screwed blued and tattooed long distance! But still our guys way overstepped on this. All the big guys are putting their heads together on how to contain this.

Kind of like stories about how peace broke out on the front for Christmas in the First World War. Guys from both sides got drunk together. The British Field Marshal wanted to shoot his soldiers for dereliction of duty. I suppose the real reason he was stopped, was someone calculated that the British wouldn't have had enough troops if they did!
 

Whiskeyjack

Mittens Margaritas Ante Porcos
Staff member
Messages
20,894
Reaction score
8,126
Ha- if you think these are Snowden's words you're sadly mistaken. You have just posted a carefully constructed PR memo. IMO, he's a traitor and this is not open for discussion in my book. If you are unable to see that, then we are too far apart to reasonably discuss.

What difference does it make if Assange wrote that statement instead of Snowden?
 

Irish Houstonian

New member
Messages
2,722
Reaction score
301
Maybe he is a "traitor".

But remember, when the gov't takes the role of the bad guy, the traitors become the good guys.
 

BobD

Can't get no satisfaction
Messages
7,918
Reaction score
1,034
Maybe he is a "traitor".

But remember, when the gov't takes the role of the bad guy, the traitors become the good guys.

and you truly believe the government is the bad guy? Seriously?

I can see the debate on whether the government is doing the right or wrong thing when it comes to all this monitoring, but to insinuate that the government is in someway conspiring against its citizens is absolutely ridiculous.
 

phgreek

New member
Messages
6,956
Reaction score
433
and you truly believe the government is the bad guy? Seriously?

I can see the debate on whether the government is doing the right or wrong thing when it comes to all this monitoring, but to insinuate that the government is in someway conspiring against its citizens is absolutely ridiculous.

Personally, I take most at their word that they are doing their best to serve our security interests judiciously...

But I've said this before...when we surrender liberty "for a good reason" ...its only a matter of time before the vile seek the power for nefarious purposes.

I keep coming back to the IRS because it is a great example of the process of degradation. The IRS was given powers to oversee tax collection, inclusive of those "avoiding" taxes...they have been given broad powers to ensure the tax code is followed because the outcome of broad defiance is really catastrophic. But this was all done under the guise that the IRS would be staunchly and systemically apolitical. When you look at the decision making chain for non-appointees in the IRS, the lawyers particularly...they donated upwards of 95% to democrats... why would anyone think it is even remotely ok for any government employee to donate anything to anyone of a political nature...much less the IRS? What this shows is the IRS is largely political, and so much so, no one in the existing IRS culture even knows it is a horrific violation of the trust originally given to the IRS for any of them to be political, much less "weaponize" the information they have for political reasons.

The NSA process is relatively new, and would take time to degrade...in theory... to the point where the IRS finds itself...but what if it did?

So no, I don't think people who make initial decisions which expose us are nefarious characters...but there are ALWAYS nefarious characters waiting to exploit vulnerabilities we create...and we are not set up to reverse things once they are in place...well unless its about getting high or drunk.
 
Top